On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 08:09:01AM +0900, Sam Roberts wrote:
> Thanks, I know I can install my own copies of things that the OS
> already has, but a ruby build that doesn't manage to use what's
> already there isn't "just working", and this is a consistent problem
> when people try to package ruby up - there package has links to local
> libs not in the package.
>
> Anybody got ruby building against the system's readline?
hmm, can you even build against the system's readline? there's a
readline framework under /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks, but there
doesn't seem to be any files in there. i guess the readline symbols are
squirreled away somewhere else? i did a global find on my machine as
root, and that location was the only readline-related file i noticed.
assuming that we can't build against a readline bundled with the OS,
what is the best way to handle this? it seems a little weird to have a
unix-based OS without a readline you can easily access. i just end up
compiling my own readline and using that when building ruby, but there
should be an easier solution!
doug
> Quoting gavin / refinery.com, on Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 10:54:30PM +0900:
> > On Feb 21, 2005, at 7:50 PM, Sam Roberts wrote:
> > >I just got this working for ruby1.8 on OS X 10.2... then upgraded.
> > >
> > >The old hack involved installing the headers for a library that was
> > >actually there, but with 10.3 and recent devel tools the headers ARE
> > >there, but I still can't get it working.
> >
> > I just re-installed everything on a brand new machine. I forgot about
> > readline at first, but then I simply downloaded the gnu version of
> > readline, compiled and installed it, and rebuilt ruby. No Fink, no
> > Apple libraries. It just worked.
> >
> >
>
--
"Contrary to what most people say, the most dangerous animal in the
world is not the lion or the tiger or even the elephant. It's a shark
riding on an elephant's back, just trampling and eating everything they
see." -- Jack Handey